Allowed¶19

Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Jul 2024CR. MISC./15152/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail Patna High Court; Sections 498A/494 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; Complaint Case No. 671C of 2022, SDJM Khagaria; mediation failed; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; conditional bail with Rs. 3,000 per month maintenance deposit in wife's bank account; cancellation of bail bond on two-month default; subject to matrimonial/maintenance proceedings; Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks, on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Khagaria in Complaint Case No. 671C of 2022, subject to section 438(2) CrPC conditions and conditions requiring monthly deposit of Rs. 3,000/- maintenance to opposite party no. 2's bank account. ¶19

Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, husband of opposite party no. 2, who apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable under Sections 498A/494 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, should be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶15

Court's answer

The petitioner is enlarged on bail (anticipatory bail) in the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Khagaria in connection with Complaint Case No. 671C of 2022, subject to the conditions under section 438(2) CrPC.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Bail is conditioned on the petitioner depositing the maintenance amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month in the savings bank account of opposite party no. 2; failure to deposit for two consecutive months gives the court below liberty to cancel the bail-bond.

¶23

Key takeaways

The maintenance payments under the order are subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings, and the order does not preclude the parties from resolving the issue otherwise.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, CR. MISC. No.15152 of 2024 (decided 23-07-2024, Prabhat Kumar Singh, J): Anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner, husband of the complainant, who apprehended arrest in Complaint Case No. 671C of 2022 (SDJM, Khagaria) punishable under Sections 498A/494 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Mediation at the Mediation & Conciliation Centre having failed (Report dated 20.07.2024), the petitioner was enlarged on bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two like sureties, subject to section 438(2) CrPC and special conditions: monthly deposit of Rs. 3,000/- maintenance in the opposite party's savings bank account (account number to be disclosed by affidavit); default for two consecutive months empowering the court below to cancel the bail-bond; payments subject to any order in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15152 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-671 Year-2022 Thana- KHAGARIA COMPALINT CASE District- Khagaria

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Son Of Late Vishnudev Yadav @ Vishnudev Yadav Khirhari resident of village -Pitaunjhia PS -Gogri DistrictKhagaria

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Kajal Devi Wife Of Santosh Yadav Resident Of Village - Kanchan Garh, PsMuffasil, Dist- Munger

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nagendra Prasad Mr. Buddhi Lal Yadav ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

5 23-07-2024

¶13

Pursuant to order dated 08.05.2024, the matter was referred to Mediation & Conciliation Centre of Patna High Court, but the dispute between the parties could not be resolved through the process of mediation and as such, mediation failed (Report dated 20.07.2024 is available at flag ‘M’).

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant / opposite party no. 2.

¶15

The petitioner, who is husband of opposite party no. 2, apprehends his arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offences under Sections 498A/494 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15152 of 2024(5) dt.23-07-2024 2/3

¶17

Petitioner is alleged to have committed torture and harassment with opposite party no. 2 for dowry.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner offers and undertakes that he is ready to give maintenance amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month, starting from this month, to opposite party no. 2.

¶19

In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is ready to give maintenance amount of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) per month to the opposite party no. 2, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, let the above-named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Khagaria in connection with Complaint Case No. 671C of 2022, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as on the following conditions:-

¶20

“(1) Opposite party no. 2 would file an affidavit before the court below and bring on record her savings bank account number for its communication to the petitioner.

¶21

(2) Petitioner would deposit the aforesaid maintenance amount per month in the savings bank account of the opposite party no. 2.

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15152 of 2024(5) dt.23-07-2024 3/3

¶23

(3) In case, the petitioner fails to deposit the maintenance amount for two consecutive months, the court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail-bond.

¶24

(4) The aforementioned payment will be subject to any order passed in matrimonial, maintenance or connected proceedings. The present order, in no way, will preclude the parties to resolve the issue otherwise.”

¶25

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶26

anay

¶27

U T

Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Niranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Kushwaha Vs The State of Bihar

Kumar Nath Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Maheshwar Rai @ Mahesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Shahbaj Khan Vs The State of Bihar